The full opinion is here:
The court ruled that the “Honest Services” statute under which he was convicted was interpreted too broadly.
The jury should have been told it only applies to bribery and kickback schemes. (A few judges wanted to strike it down as unconstitutionally vague altogether.)
It’s a short decision. The reasoning on the Honest Services statute is laid out in detail in a separate opinion in the case of Enron’s Jeffrey Skilling, also handed down this morning. That decision is here.
Update: I should add it’s unclear to me at this moment whether the case goes back to the same jury with new instructions, or whether the whole process starts from square one.
Update 2: I shouldn’t have said a new trial in the headline. First it goes back to the appeals court.